It also had a canister shell that made it a 1.5 gauge shotgun.
That's alright and all but is there anyway we could make the canister shot catch on fire? And maybe attract killer bee's and piranhas?
It also had a canister shell that made it a 1.5 gauge shotgun.
Or killer bees carrying piranhas armed with flame throwers.That's alright and all but is there anyway we could make the canister shot catch on fire? And maybe attract killer bee's and piranhas?
Or killer bees carrying piranhas armed with flame throwers.
Artillery tend to dig in, with sandbags. Against which a solid AP shot is bugger all good, as the BEF discovered in France in 1940 when the Flak 36 knocked out Matildas. I refer specifically to Arras when Rommel's Flak line disables or destroyed 24 tanks in a few minutes. Two thirds of the British tanks were lost to direct artillery, Flak or aerial attack.Can a hand grenade destroy a small artillery piece?
This is a PaK 38.
http://www.warlordgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/pak.gif
The crew are huddled tightly together behind a shield of two 4mm plates. They don't exactly have acres of room to sit back and admire any 40mm holes appearing in their cover. A 2lb AP will smash through spraying fragments in all directions, kill or injure some of the guys crewing the gun, and possibly knock the thing over. A HE shell with a few grams of filler will smash through the shield, spray fragments in all directions killing or injuring the crew slightly more thoroughly, possibly knock the thing over, and leave a scorch mark on it. It doesn't seem like it would make much of a difference at the end of the day. Where HE normally shines is in blast and splinters, but with such a tiny shell it would generally bury itself in the ground and throw the splinters mostly upward.
By all means, if a HE shell is handy and there is spare time and resources to dish it out then it might be a handy thing to have, but I don't think bombarding the Hun AT with HE in portions of two or three tablespoons is going to make a huge difference. There was far more serious things wrong with British tanking than lack of 2lb HE.
Hmmm, tracer canister. Interesting idea. Maybe magnesium.That's alright and all but is there anyway we could make the canister shot catch on fire? And maybe attract killer bee's and piranhas?
Because detonating larger projectiles with small amounts of explosive inside light fragile structures tends to reduce their aerodynamic or waterproof properties more than spraying them with machine gun bullets? On the other hand setting off an explosive in contact with the ground or sandbags and hoping for splinter damage works less well.If that small of HE was worthless, why were 20mm+ cannons so effective against aircraft? Why was 37mm HE to goto for shooting barges in the Pacific?
Oh, you mean these flak lines? http://ww2today.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/88mm-Arras.jpgArtillery tend to dig in, with sandbags. Against which a solid AP shot is bugger all good, as the BEF discovered in France in 1940 when the Flak 36 knocked out Matildas. I refer specifically to Arras when Rommel's Flak line disables or destroyed 24 tanks in a few minutes. Two thirds of the British tanks were lost to direct artillery, Flak or aerial attack.
Give the French some kudos for the pre-war move of putting a decent 47mm gun on some of their tanks - Somua S35 and the useful towed 47mm APX AT gun. Nice hole punchers, with some HE capacity on a compact format.
I've been wondering for a while on a WI the M-3/5 family of light tanks had a slightly larger turret and was equipped with the 47mm...
In the right window of time(late 30's to '42) that would have been a winner.
Potentially a brilliant gun if it had been in service in large enough numbers but would have needed a much bigger vehicle. The gun the French used on their tanks was a different lighter shorter gun the SA35 which was a 32 calibre gun.
Yup. Do you know if the ammunition was interchangeable between the two guns?
The Belgians, Czech's, and Austrian's (I believe) also made useful 47mm guns in the same time range. The Germans mounted the Czech made gun on a tank chassis as a mobile AT gun, and I think the Italians mounted the Austrian designed gun on a couple of vehicles. Basically, there were usable upgrades available in place of the 37mm guns so many were using.
In the right window of time(late 30's to '42) that would have been a winner.
You don't need tracer but think of the spectacle.Canister does NOT destroy the rifling of the barrel. When a canister round is fired, it is contained in a thin sheet metal casing that peels off after exiting the bore. I doubt you will need a tracer for it, this is a short ranged weapon designed for anti-personnel (IE, shooting the PBI) usage. Decent link below on modern use.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/02/29/shot-gunning-from-a-tank-m1028/
Even the British had an interesting 47mm. Maybe a bit overweight but most of these old WW1 guns could be lightened a bit with newer materials and toolingThe Czech 47mm was a very good weapon probably equally as good as the APX.
Skoda 47mm kanon P.U.V. vz36 anti-tank gun
The Austrian and Belgian 47s were a bit lower in performance but still better than the 37/40mm guns.